MétaCan
Menu
← Back to cohort
Record W4380988996 · doi:10.5430/jnep.v13n10p9

Factors associated with nursing students' sense of coherence: A cross-sectional study

2023· article· en· W4380988996 on OpenAlexvenueno aff
Raquel Alves de Oliveira, Gabriella Farias Lopes, Isabelle Barros Sousa, João Victor Mendonça Santana Cavalcante, Samila Gomes Ribeiro, Paula Renata Amorim Lessa Soares, Joselany Áfio Caetano, Priscila de Souza Aquino

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Nursing Education and Practice · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicHealth, psychology, and well-being
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersMinisterio de Economía y Competitividad
KeywordsSalutogenesisCross-sectional studyAnxietyPsychologySpouseCoherence (philosophical gambling strategy)Mental healthClinical psychologyMedicineNursingSocial psychologyPsychiatryPublic healthHealth promotionSociology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Background and objective: The Salutogenic Theory has a central element called Sense of Coherence, which measures the ability to cope of individuals in everyday situations. The objective of this study is to verify the factors associated with the nursing students’ Sense of Coherence.Methods: Analytical cross-sectional study, carried out with 199 students from an undergraduate nursing course at a public university in the city of Fortaleza, Ceará, Brazil, in June 2019. A form with sociodemographic and health characteristics, and Antonovsky's Sense of Coherence Questionnaire were applied. The median of the scale score was used to rate the Sense of Coherence in higher and lower.Results: The variables age up to 21 years (p = .013), not having a job (p = .032), absence of a spouse (p = .018), concern for the future (p = .006), lack of physical activity (0.023), use of psychotropic drugs (p = .002), insomnia (0.004), severe anxiety (p = .001), and moderate and severe depression (p = .000) were associated with a lower Sense of Coherence.Conclusions: The sociodemographic and academic variables presented influence the nursing students’ Sense of Coherence, which emphasizes the need for actions aimed at the more susceptible students’ mental health.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.003
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.003
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.289
GPT teacher head0.616
Teacher spread0.327 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Nursing Education and Practice→Same topicHealth, psychology, and well-being→French-language works237,207→